Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-02-15

SACRAMENTO, February ii, 1887.
The Senate was called to order at 80 p. HI,
the President in the chair
PETITIONS FILED.
By Moffitt-From residents of Oakland, against
the passage of any bills interfering with Insur-
ance rates.
By Clunie-From merchants of San Francisco,
asking for the passage of s. y. 3d. relating TO in-
surance companies.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR.
message was received from the Governor,
announcing that he had approved :. B. 10, pro
yiding tax rate for the support Of the State
University.
COMMITTEE REPORTS.
The following bills were reported from stand
ing committees
on Irrigation-su tute for s. B. 15s provid-
ing a system of irrigation and TO promote drain
age; do pass as amended. Also S. b. 3, relat-
ing to appropriation of water; do pass
On Judiciary-S. b. 34S; no recommendation.
Also 5. B. 6; do not pass. Also, S. B. 5S relat-
ing to the distribution of estates OF deceased
non-residents, when intestate; DO pass. Also. ;.
b. %, relating to insurance. no reeommenda-
ton. Also, 5. B. 100, relating to Notaries Public;
no recommendation. Also, ;. b. 81 (snd 81, re-
lating TO insurance; no recommendation. Also,
S. B. So, authorizing corporations to act as eX-
ecutors in certain cases; no recommendation.
Also S. B. 13l relating to peremptory challenges;
do not pass. Also, ). B. 49, relating to properly
subject to taxation; do not pass. Also, ). b. l54,
relating to actions for libel and slandeI do not
of public buildings do not pass. Also, s. b. 1876;
do not pass. Also s. B. 240, transferring moneys
from the State Drainage Fund to the General
Fund; do pass Also, S. b. 2i2, relating to
the seduction of unmarried females urdeT
twenty years of age; no recommendation. Also,
S. b. 325, relating TO agents for foreign eorpor-
ations; do pass. Also, S. b. 29S do pass
Also s. B. 329, relating to jurors; do pass as
amended. Also, S. B. S14; do not pass. Also,
s. B. S37 relating to trademarks; do pass. Also,
S. B. 332 relating to county licenses. Referred.
Also s B. 372. relating TO the duties OF Courts
in probate cases; do pass. Also, :. B. 3I3, re-
lating to the issuance of alias summons; no
recommendation. Also, A. i. 5, relative to the
settlement of estates of deceased persons; do
| pass as amended. Also, A. b. 81, relating to
temporary exchanges of Courts by Superior
| Judges; do pass. Also, 4. B. 81, relating to
| acknowledgements; do pass as amended. A. b.
| 81, relating TO the wills of married women; do
pass Also, A B. 36, relating to the Tune OF en-
| Try of judgments in Justices Courts; do pass.
| Also, A b. ISL, relating to alias summons Go
| pass. Also, A. b. 70, relating to practice ln
| Police Courts: do pass. Also, a. B. 20, to pro
| hibit Gaping" for lawyers about prisons; dc
pass Also, A =. %; do pass. Also, A b. IS, re-
| lating to property exempt from taxation: do not
| pass. Also, S. b. Dol, relating to pawnbrokersi
do pass; Also, 6. B. 266: do not pass. Also, S; B.
| 275 relating to public lands; do not pass. Also
| s y. 277 do not pass. Also, s. b. III; do pass.
Bills INTRODUCED.
BY Chinese Committee-Relating to ofienses
| against public justice
| By Motfitt-To create the county of San Lean
| dro.
BY Clunie-To provide wharfage and for the
collection of Wharfage rates in San Francisco.
| By Ciunie-To authorize the Harbor Commits
| sioners to lease lands under their control.
BY Clunie-To authorize the Hsrbor Commits
sioners to construct railroads along the San
Francisco water front.
By Caminetti-To provide for the construction
OF ishWays, etc.
By yGesford-Amendings Section 1474 ofthe Civil
Code, relating to homesteGds
BY Hall-Kelating 10 the appropriation oi
water
By White-To promote correct conveyancing;
By White-To regulate the management and
control of irTigating bitches.
By Goucher-For the protection of miners in
certain cases.
BY McCudden-To prevent cattle and other
live stock from running at large on the public
highways.
By Wiison--For the relief of Miss Urelfa
Pfeitfer, in consequence of the appropriation by
the State University of a certain water right.
SUITS AGAINST THE STATE.
The special order (Clunies bin authorizing
suits to be brought against the otatel coming VI
on Ceninettis motion to reconsider the vote b!
which it was passed. Clunie moved To indef
nitely postpone the motion.
After some debate the motion to indefinite y
postpone was carried-ayes I6, noes Is.
RIPARIAN RIGHTS.
The next special order was Bowers bill to re-
peal Section l422 of Title VIII. of the Civil Code
| laffiIming the doctrine of riparian rights as
| known to the English common law. The pend
| ing question was LangGord's amendment detin'
| ing riparian rights
Rose of Los Angeles spoke at considerable
| length in favor of the bill.
| Chandler opposed the BILL saying that he
| favored the promotion of irrigation interests
| but could not vote to wipe out riparian rights.
Abbott Of Contra Costa favored the repeal.
! He declared that California was the only dry
country in which this English doctrine has been
allowed to prevail. The law is wrong in pTinci-
pie, and ought to be repealed.
Caminetti ard Crandall spoke against the bill.
LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS.
Pending arguments on the bill, Stecfe called
up his motion TO reconsider the vote 10y which
Senate constitutional amendment No 3 was de-
feated on Friday. The vote was reconsidered-
ayes D. noes 3.
EVENING SESSIONS.
Caminett called up his motion TO reconsider
the vote by which his motion for evening ses-
s;ons had been defeated. So ordered, and the
rules were amended so as to provide for night
sessions, commencing on Thursday, the 17th in
slant.
DEBATE RESUMED
White of Los Angeles resumed the debate on
the bill to repeal the riparian rights provision
of the Civil Code. He declared that past ac-
quired rights could not be disturbed by any leg
islation, and it was only desired to legisate for
the future by no longer encouraging persons TO
settle upon the banks of streams and appropri-
ate the waters thereof, to the exclusion of
others. He was not III favor of having waters
flow unused from the mountains TO the sea,
when they might have been devoted to develop
ing the resources Of the soil
Steele of San Luis ObispO said he was in favor
of a general system of irrigation under State
control, but thought il would be wise TO retain
the present law until some such system might
be agreed upon. If the proposed repeal were
successful the unnavigable waters OF the State
would be appropriated at once, and the water
sold to individuals at exorbitaut rates.
Bowers of san Diego spoke earnestly in be-
half of his bill, severely criticising the action
of those members who always talk in favor of
irrigation and invariably vote the other way.
The debate was further continued by Patter-
son. Conklin and Langford, and lasted until
after o clock 7. NJ.
On call of the roll the Langford amendment
was lost, by vote of 13 ayes to 20 noes
A motion to adjourn at this juncture was
voted down.
The question next came up on the amend
ment offered by the committee, providing that
the repeal of Section 1I22 shall not affect vested
rights
CrandaIl took the floor. and spoke at length
against the proposed repeal.
Caminetti, interrupting, remarked that If the
gentleman was talking against time he might
accomplish the same object by giving notice of
q motion TO reconsider.
Steele, at 6:l5. moved to adjourn. Lost.
White moved the previous question.
VTooman thought it very unparliamentary
and unfair for the friends of the bill to attempt
to choke Off debate by those opposed to it.
Pending further discussion the senate at GO
adjourned